Jump to content

Who are the really bad players?

bad players

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1 reply to this topic

TriskacTankista #1 Posted 30 August 2013 - 05:26 AM


  • Player
  • 7708 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
The question is, really, who are those very bad players?
I am not talking about the players that are progressing on their learning curve. No matter if you have few hundred or some thousand games, you're progressing and that is great. Nobody started with the full knowledge of how the game works. Everyone in his own pace, some quicker, some slower. I am not the one to judge, I am making that progress as well.
But... what questions my mind lately is, who are the players that have played 10k or more games and still lurk somewhere around 200 wn rating, winning only around 44% of their games? Now I am not too obsessed over stats or anything. Yes, they can be deceiving and if you take that very wide portion of players in the middle, their stats say very little about their real abilities. However having wn rating below 300 after more than 10k games is so extreme, that those have to say something about the player.
If there is anyone who can shed a bit of light somehow, please do so.
I was thinking:
- Players with very shallow learning curve - possible, but really... I can understand it takes a bit longer for someone to grasp the concept of a game, but I doubt it would take them THIS much time.
- Very young players - not sure what age should we be talking about, but very young children will probably have difficulties understanding the bigger picture which could lead into them playing very poorly. Still, I think even a children around 10 years old should probably be able to progressively learn the game.
- Bots - many of the mentioned "players" surely are bots, but not all of them...
What do you think?
And if you know anyone who has such bad stats after so many games, would you be so kind and help me to understand what really is behind it? :)
Please understand that I am sincerely interested in this phenomenon and in all honesty, this was not meant to be a whine post with camo net :)

Edited by TriskacTankista, 30 August 2013 - 06:14 AM.

Feuerpause #2 Posted 30 August 2013 - 06:04 AM


  • Player
  • 16543 battles
  • 72
  • [-UPS-] -UPS-
  • Member since:
An 'average' Player (in the broadest sense) should after several thousands games approach a win rate of 50 %. If this is not the case if generally means that he is contributing less to his team than an average player and thus brings the team down. Why can this be ? Apart from the obvious lack of playing skills that could be :
+ frequent AFK (so 1/16 of the fighting power less)
+ slow internet connection
+ poor management of crew skills and equipment
+ less-than-average use of boosts such as gold ammo and consumables
and last but not least
+ frequent switching of tanks and equipment, i.e. having 'stock' and 'underpowered' tanks until they are 'elite'.
So in that sense, even the win rates are very misleading of who is a 'good' player or not.
If you want a high win ratio you would have to do something like :
+ play only gold tanks as they are 'elite' from the beginning or at least use free XP to boost your tank asap
+ use gold ammo and premium consumables (fuel, rations, etc).
+ more or less always play the same tanks, so know your tank in and out AND your crew has all the perks/skills such as brothers in arms, repairs, etc.
+ platoon with (good) friends
LAST, some people might not have the goal of winning. Check the stats on this site for several categories. E.g. the 'most detected' ranking is very revealing.
Player 'Quant' leads the 'most detected' score. But even this guy with 50k games has jiust a win ratio of 50.0 %.
Seocnd is 'colinbrett666' with 72k battles with just 45.5 % win ratio. So even these 'experienced' guys have no impact on their teams, or even a negative one.

Edited by Feuerpause, 30 August 2013 - 06:08 AM.

Also tagged with bad players

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users